Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-16-2009, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Philly
10,223 posts, read 16,775,275 times
Reputation: 2972

Advertisements

some interesting points
Quote:
[LEFT]Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's proposals to sell the city's parking garages and slap a 1 percent tuition tax on the city's colleges are coming for one reason...
[LEFT]But now the region's economic engines are hospitals and universities, and they mostly don't pay property taxes. They don't pay city payroll taxes, either. Then you throw in the fact that we've spent most of the past century remaking our highways, often tearing down city neighborhoods to do so, to make it ever more convenient to flee the city when the workday ends....
Pittsburgh has more residents per square mile than five of the 10 largest cities


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09316/1012835-155.stm#ixzz0X2QfEySE...


so what taxes do these non-profits pay? this is a problem in Philly as well where a commission recomended shifting to a property tax, the problem with that is that so much of the property is tax free. this recomendation actually shifts MORE of the tax burden, in some ways, onto "the rest" since the wage tax is paid by non-profiut workers.
[/LEFT]
[/LEFT]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-16-2009, 12:47 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,945,617 times
Reputation: 2910
I agree with the author that the basic problem is that the taxing jurisdiction and relevant patterns of economic activity are not well-aligned (and I say this as a member of a household with two people working in the City using a daycare in the City while living just outside it--in other words, I am admitting we are undertaxed).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 12:53 PM
 
Location: NOT a native Pittsburgher
323 posts, read 833,442 times
Reputation: 130
The problem is all the real companies left and now there are only non-profits. Maybe the city should have thought of that 10+ years ago. But according to the cheerleaders, there are so many people and companies moving back to Pittsburgh that there isn't a tax burden issue. Why else would Pittsburgh be on all those top ten lists?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Western PA
3,733 posts, read 5,949,444 times
Reputation: 3189
This was a good column by Brian O'Neill. His other point is also true: all Pennsylvania cities are facing the same dilemma. It's due to our outdated jurisdictions and the inability of the cities to stretch their boundaries like they can do in other parts of the country. I believe he said in an earlier column that the city of Houston's boundaries are almost identical to the square mileage of Allegheny County, and I know that Phoenix has expanded from 15 square miles to 517, almost as big as Allgheny County.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 01:05 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,945,617 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by bethany12 View Post
The problem is all the real companies left and now there are only non-profits. Maybe the city should have thought of that 10+ years ago.
And driven the non-profits out of town too so that nothing would be left?

The truth is the City had nothing to say about the economic losses caused by the steel bust, and since then the City has added economic activity in for-profit sectors as well as non-profit sectors. So it isn't the case that growth in the non-profit sectors somehow excludes growth in the for-profit sectors.

Quote:
But according to the cheerleaders, there are so many people and companies moving back to Pittsburgh that there isn't a tax burden issue
Actually, the precise problem is that the proportion of jobs to residents in the City has dramatically increased because the job situation recovered a lot faster than the population (which may just now be growing, but even if so the turnaround was very recent).

So you have all these people working in the City but paying (usually lower) wage taxes somewhere else in the Metro Area. And even if both jobs and population are on upward tracks in the City as of now, that gap will likely persist for the conceivable future (unless the population starts growing a lot faster than the jobs, which isn't particularly likely).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Philly
10,223 posts, read 16,775,275 times
Reputation: 2972
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
I agree with the author that the basic problem is that the taxing jurisdiction and relevant patterns of economic activity are not well-aligned (and I say this as a member of a household with two people working in the City using a daycare in the City while living just outside it--in other words, I am admitting we are undertaxed).
actually, another problem is that growth has been in the non-profit sector regardless of the "jurisdiction problem." and if you get a lot of tax revenue from property taxes, having huge amounts of exempted land is a killer. I wonder, could the city simply charge for EMS, trash, etc directly to sidestep this tax? I'd also agree that the tax would have little impact on students decision on where to go. Perhaps Pitt should work to have itself declared a city of the first class. Personally, I'd prefer if the mayor was proposing the 1% school tax in order to reduce property taxes OR reduce the net income tax to make Pitt a more attractive place to live vis a vis the suburbs and other cities. that said, some of this its outside pitt's control but NOT outside the state's control. Penn has the highest corp income tax in the country, that HAS to change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 01:25 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,945,617 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by pman View Post
actually, another problem is that growth has been in the non-profit sector regardless of the "jurisdiction problem."
But the City has in fact seen economic growth in for-profit sectors as well. Again, the idea that somehow growth in the non-profit sectors is crowding out growth in for-profit sectors doesn't really make sense and isn't happening in practice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Philly
10,223 posts, read 16,775,275 times
Reputation: 2972
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
But the City has in fact seen economic growth in for-profit sectors as well. Again, the idea that somehow growth in the non-profit sectors is crowding out growth in for-profit sectors doesn't really make sense and isn't happening in practice.
so over the past four decades, growth in the for profit sector tax base has outpaced that of the non-profit? crowding out wasn't the point, the point was that an increasing share of the city's tax base is non-profit, particularly for the real estate taxes. this is happening all over PA as universities and hospital complexes grow, more proeprty is removed from the tax rolls. in Philly, the stadium district (included in parks) is exempt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 03:03 PM
 
357 posts, read 887,131 times
Reputation: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by pman View Post
I wonder, could the city simply charge for EMS, trash, etc directly to sidestep this tax?
Does the city provide trash service to large non-profits?
(e.g. does the city empty Pitt's dumpsters?)


I would like to see more focus by the city on cutting legacy costs and reducing the size of the city government (i.e. reduce headcount) and less focus on adding new taxes...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2009, 03:12 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,945,617 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by pman View Post
so over the past four decades, growth in the for profit sector tax base has outpaced that of the non-profit?
No, but my point is that as long as both are growing, there is no prima facie reason to assume the growth non-profit sectors is crowding out growth in for-profit sectors.

Quote:
crowding out wasn't the point . . . more proeprty is removed from the tax rolls.
That is a form of crowding out argument. If you assume that the non-profit has simply taken the place of a for-profit in the same location, then it may make sense to talk about there being a problem with property being "removed from the tax rolls". But if you instead assume that the for-profit is still in the taxing jurisdiction, but just in a different location, then the total assessed value of the taxable property in the jurisdiction shouldn't have been changed by the presence of the non-profit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:15 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top